The question isn’t only whether Hobby Lobby (and other for-profit corporations that sell secular goods/services) are persons, but rather whether they are persons that “exercise religion.” If they are not exercising religion, then RFRA is not triggered, no matter how much personhood they have.
On Jun 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Hillel Y. Levin <hillelle...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why doesn't 1 USC sec. 1 resolve the first-stage question in Hobby Lobby > (whether RFRA applies to corporations)? "[T]he words “person” and “whoever” > include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, > societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals." > > Are the two sides really just arguing about whether [RFRA's] "context > indicates otherwise" (1 USC 1) sufficiently to overcome this strong > definitional statement? > > If so, much as I'd personally like for Hobby Lobby to lose this case, I'd > think that the on this question at least, the plaintiffs have to win. After > all, we have a strong statutory definition, with at best equivocal contextual > evidence to the contrary. > > What am I missing? Are there cases dealing with the "context" language in 1 > USC 1? > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; > people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) > forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
